Login

**Neo-Scholastic** · October 13, 2015 at 8:00 pm

Well I suppose if you follow Anslem with God as "that which the greater than which can be conceived," then it follows that whatever god concept you can conceive will seem fictional by comparison.

~~Edwardo Piet~~ · October 13, 2015 at 8:28 pm

If it is inconceivable then how do you comprehend what it is even that you're supposedly believing in? That's what I wonder.

Wyrd of Gawd · October 14, 2015 at 3:42 am

(October 13, 2015 at 8:28 pm)Evie Wrote: If it is inconceivable then how do you comprehend what it is even that you're supposedly believing in? That's what I wonder.

Since all gods are imaginary people can fashion them as they like.

~~Edwardo Piet~~ · (This post was last modified: October 14, 2015 at 9:16 am by Edwardo Piet.)

Yes but if it's inconceivable then that means they don't even believe what they think they believe because they can't conceive of it.

**Cinjin** · October 15, 2015 at 5:45 pm

(October 13, 2015 at 8:00 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Well I suppose if you follow Anslem with God as "that which the greater than which can be conceived," then it follows that whatever god concept you can conceive will seem fictional by comparison.

Come again?

Is Anslem a Star Trek reference? Seriously, you lost me.

**robvalue** · October 16, 2015 at 3:21 am

I think it's the lion from Narnia.

~~Edwardo Piet~~ · (This post was last modified: October 16, 2015 at 7:47 am by Edwardo Piet.)

One of the worst of the worst arguments for God's existence was by Anselm:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontological_argument

He's such a fucktard. Dawkins dealt with it easily in TGD.

David Hume dealt with the B.S pretty well too, from the same Wiki article:

David Hume owning Anselm's ass Wrote:...there is an evident absurdity in pretending to demonstrate a matter of fact, or to prove it by any arguments a priori. Nothing is demonstrable, unless the contrary implies a contradiction. Nothing, that is distinctly conceivable, implies a contradiction. Whatever we conceive as existent, we can also conceive as non-existent. There is no being, therefore, whose non-existence implies a contradiction. Consequently there is no being, whose existence is demonstrable.

**Cinjin** · (This post was last modified: October 16, 2015 at 5:44 pm by Cinjin.)

(October 15, 2015 at 5:45 pm)Cinjin Wrote:
(October 13, 2015 at 8:00 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: Well I suppose if you follow Anslem with God as "that which the greater than which can be conceived," then it follows that whatever god concept you can conceive will seem fictional by comparison.

Come again?

Is Anslem a Star Trek reference? Seriously, you lost me.

Ohhh -

thank you Evie for the clarification. Chad, a quick proof-read might have aided me in deciphering that mess of a post you made. christ. Spelling, punctuation, hell - even correct word usage ... never mind, I digress.

By your own statement aren't you then implying that your christian god would inevitably fall into a fictional status?

**The Grand Nudger** · (This post was last modified: October 16, 2015 at 5:10 pm by The Grand Nudger.)

I've gotta ask, regarding the OP...what's the difference between your deists god and an imaginary god anyway? I just wonder how your situation relates to any change in your position or beliefs. Was your deism not -functionally- equivalent to atheism beforehand? Are there any changes in your life or your behavior on account of this, any changes in separate but related positions?

**Cinjin** · October 16, 2015 at 5:43 pm

(October 16, 2015 at 5:05 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I've gotta ask, regarding the OP...what's the difference between your deists god and an imaginary god anyway? I just wonder how your situation relates to any change in your position or beliefs. Was your deism not -functionally- equivalent to atheism beforehand? Are there any changes in your life or your behavior on account of this, any changes in separate but related positions?

A fair question indeed.
I'll address them in the order received:

Quote:I've gotta ask, regarding the OP...what's the difference between your deists god and an imaginary god anyway?

The distinction you make as to a deist god being different than an imaginary one seems to have no bearing since atheists believe all gods are imaginary. It seems obvious to me that no matter what god one chooses to believe in, they are going to make the basic distinction that their particular god is not imaginary. Deism has nothing to do with that bit of logic. Ergo, prior to my statement about me saying gods are imaginary, I too would fall into that category of special pleading.

Quote:I just wonder how your situation relates to any change in your position or beliefs. Was your deism not -functionally- equivalent to atheism beforehand?

My deism has never been on a completely equal footing with atheism. Even in the Tiberius' thread, "Do You Believe In God?" I answer to the affirmative. Only in religious practice was I an atheist. ie. I never prayed, worshiped, proselytized, etc. and defended the ideals of the atheist mind and practice.

Quote:Are there any changes in your life or your behavior on account of this, any changes in separate but related positions?

No. My question is only posed for my own state of mind and how I justify a position to argue from when in a social situation or possibly in some sort of online forum ... <wink>.
We live in a world of labels, not to mention my own peace of mind when it comes to intellectual honesty with others.
I feel the question, what am I? is a valid one since our physical and spiritual existence is so heavily weighted in our society. Do I care so much what others think? Well... yes and no. It would matter to me if my acquaintances viewed me as a wishy-washy flake who couldn't make his mind up about what he believes and even argued both sides of the coin dependent upon who's company I was keeping on any given day.

Thus the introspection and resulting quandary.

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me